What happens when you run out of VRAM?

[ProX]

Hi,
First of all, this is NOT an issue thread, I have no VRAM related problems, I just want to know more about this.
I want to know, what happens when you run out of VRAM, when you find an in-game scene that needs more VRAM than your card can provide?
Are there FPS drops, and how bad are they?
I'm just a bit worried the GTX 970 won't age as well as the R9 390 will with its - admittedly a bit overkill - 8GB VRAM.
Thanks.

 

[Rogue Leader]

The game won't crash, however what does happen is the textures can't be held in that ultra fast GDDR5 ram on the card, so they need to stream out of system RAM (slower) or off the drive (WAY SLOWER). Performance wise this will translate into fps drops and stuttering. You can mitigate this by backing off on things like anti-aliasing.

 

[glamdringfh]

When and if you happen run out of video memory, then your PC will have to constantly jerk textures between main memory and video memory, which causes massive slowdowns, generally to unplayable levels. Modern GPUs will run into a hybrid mode where the drivers/GPU start streaming texture data from system RAM over the PCIe bus to make up for the "missing" RAM. Since system RAM is 3-5X slower than GDDR5 with much higher latency, running out of "VRAM" would translate into a significant FPS loss.

I would not worry about that at all as long as you have 2-4GB of VRAM. This will change in the future as technology advances, but for now you don't need to worry about VRAM unless you run multiple monitors at high resolutions.

 

[Rogue Leader]

When and if you happen run out of video memory, then your PC will have to constantly jerk textures between main memory and video memory, which causes massive slowdowns, generally to unplayable levels. Modern GPUs will run into a hybrid mode where the drivers/GPU start streaming texture data from system RAM over the PCIe bus to make up for the "missing" RAM. Since system RAM is 3-5X slower than GDDR5 with much higher latency, running out of "VRAM" would translate into a significant FPS loss.

I would not worry about that at all as long as you have 2-4GB of VRAM. This will change in the future as technology advances, but for now you don't need to worry about VRAM unless you run multiple monitors at high resolutions.

Admittedly though the OP is worrying about the future, and there has been a recent test:

http://www.tweaktown.com/tweakipedia/89/much-vram-need-1080p-1440p-4k/index.html

Even today there are games that can nearly max out 4gb of VRAM even at 1080p. I would imagine this is only going to get worse in the future. So today (or if you're willing to back things down a bit) sure, but as time goes on, its going to definitely make a difference, and if the future is your worry and where you are deciding to spend your money, overkill is always better.

 

[renz496]

Stutter? Though i see something interesting in win 10. Usually ACU will stutter with my 960 because full VRAM utilization but under Win10 I see VRAM usage exceeding my VRAM capacity but there is no stutter? Anyway why not bring in 290 in the equation as well. Just my opinion (my observation actually) more VRAM does not necessarily mean more 'future proof'. Because the raw performance of the card also important. Just look at GTX Titan. The card has 6GB VRAM. in gaming (specifically) does that extra VRAM really worth it? In the end 4GB card like 970 and 290 still faster than GTX Titan at 4k despite habing much less VRAM. I see the same with both 390 and 390X. That's why you should look at 290 and 290X as well.

 

[Rogue Leader]

Stutter? Though i see something interesting in win 10. Usually ACU will stutter with my 960 because full VRAM utilization but under Win10 I see VRAM usage exceeding my VRAM capacity but there is no stutter? Anyway why not bring in 290 in the equation as well. Just my opinion (my observation actually) more VRAM does not necessarily mean more 'future proof'. Because the raw performance of the card also important. Just look at GTX Titan. The card has 6GB VRAM. in gaming (specifically) does that extra VRAM really worth it? In the end 4GB card like 970 and 290 still faster than GTX Titan at 4k despite habing much less VRAM. I see the same with both 390 and 390X. That's why you should look at 290 and 290X as well.

GTX 970 and R9 290 faster than a Titan at 4k? Are you crazy?

http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/1905-gta-v-pc-fps-benchmark-graphics-cards
http://www.tested.com/tech/pcs/529725-testing-geforce-gtx-980-ti-4k-benchmarks/
http://wccftech.com/amd-r9-390x-nvidia-gtx-980ti-titanx-benchmarks/

The only thing competitive with a Titan at 4k are SLI'd 970s,980's, the 980 Ti, or on the AMD side, the 295x2, crossfired 290's, 290X, 390, 390x, and the Fury X. The speed has nothing to do with memory, but the implication that any of those GPU's are as fast as the Titan X on their own is insane. You're right in the raw performance being important, however we have chipsets from 4 years ago that are still competitive in today's market (GTX 780, R9 280x). So buying something real fast with too much VRAM today will definitely future proof you somewhat for tomorrow

 

[renz496]

read carefully what i wrote. i said GTX Titan not GTX Titan X. and i've also mention 6GB VRAM. Titan X have 12GB VRAM. Geez. did people already forgot GTX Titan and Titan Black?

 

[Rogue Leader]

read carefully what i wrote. i said GTX Titan not GTX Titan X. and i've also mention 6GB VRAM. Titan X have 12GB VRAM. Geez. did people already forgot GTX Titan and Titan Black?

You're right I did forget about it, but a nearly 3 year old 1 generation behind card has nothing to do with this discussion. The processors in both cards you mentioned are faster (and newer) and there are only some games at the highest settings that even utilize 4gb of VRAM right now. The OP however is worried about the future, and yes raw power is more important, but as games utilize more VRAM, this issue will show up, for the folks trying to push their equipment to the edge and don't want to upgrade.

 

[renz496]

nah i just point out that gpu raw performance also important aside of VRAM amount. many would think that 8GB will be future proof. true VRAM usage will increase. but so are the need of raw performance. back then they say GTX Titan will be 'future proof' when games start utilizing more VRAM. then look at this:

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/NVIDIA/GeForce_GTX_Titan_X/9.html

and we know ACU is quite VRAM hog even on the lowest preset. the 6GB on GTX Titan clearly did not give any advantage. 390X and 390 could face similar issue. then in the end if he really want to play the game on higher setting with good frame rates he still need to get faster card. so the choice is either get much cheaper 290/290X with 4GB right now or get much expensive 390/390X but in the end still need to upgrade in the future because the gpu raw performance is not enough.

 

[Rogue Leader]

The truth is future proof is a myth, there is no such thing as future proof, you just pick the equipment that will best survive to be good enough in the future. A card with more VRAM in a few years when all new games will need 4gb+ will perform better than the same card with less VRAM. However a card thats newer probably won't need all that VRAM to get by because it (and the system its in) makes up for that VRAM deficiency by raw power. You never really "run out of VRAM", because system memory is always a fallback. It depends though how quickly the system can process it and pass the data with the card.

 

[renz496]

Never buy the idea as well. Just build and hope for the best? Haha. Hopefully next gen gpu to coming out soon......

 

[ProX]

I would not worry about that at all as long as you have 2-4GB of VRAM. This will change in the future as technology advances, but for now you don't need to worry about VRAM unless you run multiple monitors at high resolutions.

Are you serious?
Shadow of Mordor really loves its VRAM, with 4.7GB of VRAM being used at just 1080p with AA enabled, up from the 3.3GB used without AA. GTA V use 3.9GB of VRAM with AA enabled at 1080p...